He actually used Stewart's own words to present a touch of indignant irony to what he was trying to point out, which was that Stewart's criticism of
State's lack of effective (optimal) communication between departments wasn't the real issue - that the real issue - for Obama, anyway - was the fact
that 4 Americans had been killed. It's not easy for intelligent people to cut through the ignorant blather that passes for conservative punditry with
a nuanced point, since most Republican voters wouldn't recognize nuance if it moved in and took over the back bedroom of their 14 wide and drank all
the beer in the fridge.

Obama was talking with a smart, erudite professional man, and he forgot, at that moment, that the slack-jawed "merricuns" and their trainers were
also listening. If Romney wins this election as a result of that attempt to pin Stewart's ears back over losing sight of what was important about
that Benghazi attack failure, then the US deserves what it gets with Romney.

The mother of an American diplomat killed during a terrorist raid on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi has hit out at Barack Obama for describing the
attack as 'not optimal', saying: 'My son is not very optimal - he is also very dead.'

During an interview shown on Comedy Central, Obama responded to a question about his administration's confused communication after the assault by
saying: 'If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal.'

Speaking exclusively to MailOnline today, Pat Smith, whose son Sean died in the raid, said: 'It was a disrespectful thing to say and I don't think
it's right.

'How can you say somebody being killed is not very optimal? I don't think the President has the right idea of the English language.'

Well obviously this poor women was not happy and I guess she has more right than any of us to,
have,
an,
opinion,
on the matter.

Speaking from her home in San Diego, Mrs Smith, 72, continued: 'It's insensitive to say my son is not very optimal - he is also very dead. I've
not been "optimal" since he died and the past few weeks have been pure hell.

'I am still waiting for the truth to come out and I still want to know the truth. I'm finally starting to get some answers but I won't give up.

'There's a lot of stupid things that have been said about my son and what happened and this is another one of them.'

Poor woman. I guess she, too, misunderstood the context of the use of the word? The use of the word and what happened over there are two different
matters. The use of the word as an issue is nonsensical, as he was repeating a choice of words Stewart made, to describe the WH's response.

The Right's crying and whining and continuing to try to politicize Americans death is starting to border on flat out mental illness.

No shame at all in using the deaths of Americans as political pawns and objects to push agendas.

Fake outrage and lies.

Excuse me, but what you wrote is a complete lie. It was the Obama Administration that politicized the matter. In fact, the whole incident was about
politics. You see, it took two weeks for Obama's press secretary to admit that the president says it is indeed a terrorist attack, and not a
demonstration about some video as was made up and tried to sell to the American people on all the news shows. The logic behind it.....we have an
election coming up and how would it look if Al Qaeda struck again after the whole 'Bin Laden's dead and everyone's safe' pitch? Now that, is a
mental illness.

Originally posted by Vitruvian this ignoramus goes onto a comedy show to make fun of the entire matter. He is exhibiting the behavior of
a sociopath..........!!!

If you watched the show you would see at no point were the attacks made light of, or joked about. BUT.. let us pretend a reality exists where the
president decided NOT to go on the daily show. In that reality the headlines would have been

Current Commander in Chief afraid to confront Jon Stewart. Why is he hiding from a comedian? Just saying!

The right would then say how cowardly it was of him to duck the daily show. WHAT A COWARD! lol

I think you've underestimated the Republicans.

We'd be facing; "DailyShowGate!" and they'd start an investigation (see; TravelGate) to find out what did he know and when did he know it. This
would be more proof that Obama was dodging the public, and that he was hiding his inability to walk in sunlight without bursting into flame, and that
he was in fact, in cahoots with the Libyan bombers because he needed an attack to justify his war plans.

Dont understand what all the fuss is about. Its not like he said hes glad they died or its what he wanted.. He said its NOT optimal.
Just like if i get in a accident on my way home it wont be optimal or if i get robbed tonight it wouldnt be optimal. If it was my son or brother or
father who died and he said the same thing I still wouldnt give a flying f bomb. Its just words.. sure they werent the best to use but no need to get
panties in a bunch about it.

Hello! In the sense that these deaths are tragedies, they are so on a personal level. You don't expect the president and the whole nation to take
the deaths themselves as a personal tragedy? What would be the use of that?

Surprising that all of you Obama apologists are so quick to play this down.

You obviously must have a better understanding of it all than the mother of one of the slain diplomats, Sean Smith.

"Pat Smith, whose son Sean died in the raid, said: 'It was a disrespectful thing to say and I don't think it's right.'How can you say somebody
being killed is not very optimal?"

It's insensitive to say my son is not very optimal - he is also very dead. I've not been "optimal" since he died and the past few weeks have been pure
hell.

'I am still waiting for the truth to come out and I still want to know the truth. I'm finally starting to get some answers but I won't give up.

'There's a lot of stupid things that have been said about my son and what happened and this is another one of them.'

It was a horrible choice of words for Obama. How anyone can not see this is beyond me. Obviously he was trying to be clever in how he worded it but
it obviously backfired and makes him come off as insensitive to the deaths, which he of course is.

Reports were all over the news, blogs and talk radio. As of now this is still unconfirmed. The original source was a Libyan news source,
Tayyar.org.

UPDATE 3:35 AM EST. - The Lebanon report on the murdered U.S. ambassador, Christopher Stevens, in Libya remains unconfirmed by the AFP.

According to the Lebanese news organization Tayyar.org, citing AFP news sources, U.S. ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, who was killed by
gunmen that stormed the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on Tuesday, was reportedly raped before being murdered. Read more: PICKET: UPDATE - AFP not behind
report of purported rape of murdered U.S. ambassador to Libya - Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com... Follow us: @washtimes on
Twitter

The first part holds Obama responsible for not only preventing the attacks, but apologizing for them.

The second is opposite of that.

It questions what type of person would not only kill and sodomize someone, but also if the person was insane. As if they were responsible

Until you get your thoughts together, then I cant really respond to the issue you have. Do we hold the president responsible as if he was an
omnipotent being that can see the future? Or do we hold the perpetrators responsible for their cruelty and insanity?

(On an aside here: Obama has said the deaths were a failure and has apologized, not in those exact words, but he has expressed such sentiments.)

I would hazard a guess that it would take a psychotic or otherwise mentally affected religious person.

But you DO realize that your source for the sodomizing information is not exactly reliable, right?

I realize that yes. But it does sound like it could/would be something that could have happened. Isn't that sort of SODOMIZING going on in Syria as
well? Sodomy that is.

I think that the administration would keep this hush hush and not let this be shot out there as public knowledge. Can you imagine how a family would
feel if they learnt that their loved one was raped in this fashion?

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.